They all look like rich people homes to me. Ron Paul's home is paid for and the man has no debt. I wonder if that can be said about anyone else on the list? Ron Paul is certainly not middle class, but he lives a modest lifestyle for his income level and is financially responsible, just as he has been as a Congressman and just as he will be as President.

So these guys are being punished for being succesful in life, and being smart with their money?
Aside from ron paul, i cant think of any politician who actually speaks for the common man.
Look at al gores fricking house sometime. This ahole bitches about "global warming", yet his carbon footprint is larger than my entire neighborhood. Gimme a break.

I don't understand why everyone hates the rich. You may hate the system for not allowing a "common person" to have the ability to be elected but that is no fault of the rich. I would rather live in a country run by someone who successfully ran a business and accumulated wealth than someone who has not been successful.

It is the same way with all of these people on wall street hating the top 1%. They should be in Washington D.C. if they have a problem with the laws that allow them to get rich or allow them to not pay enough taxes.

I would rather live in a country run by someone who successfully ran a business and accumulated wealth than someone who has not been successful.

You left out an important option that has nothing to do with money. I would rather live in a country run by someone who understands and respects individual liberty and free markets. Such a person can be poor, average, rich, or ludicrously wealthy and have no bearing on those most important issues.

Snyder, you are totally missing the point. I would like to have a politician that experienced how most of America struggles every day at least once in his life. Many of these politicians are not self made. They are rich or have had opportunities to become rich because of the wealth of their family. Do you think Romney ever had to worry about not having enough money to feed his family?

The rich put other rich in place to run this country and to return the favor once in power. This is one of the fundamental issues with our corrupt government today. Greed may be good in business, but not in politics.

I do not advocate redistribution of wealth and painting all the wealthy as bad people is not my intent. Just stop the corporate welfare! I'm tired of the excuse that the rich should get a pass because they create jobs & wealth. Many of them caused the stock market to crash, sent jobs overseas and do not pay their share in taxes because of tax code loopholes. Their greed is destroying America.

Look around...The rich with the help of many politicians have started a class war to become even more rich. The war against collective bargaining rights and public employees will only hurt the middle class and country in the end. Our government can no longer afford police on the street or teachers for our children, yet statistics show the 1% gets richer and pay less taxes than ever.

The 1% of earners actually pay 40% of all income taxes in the country. I don't think you realized that you contridicted yourself in just a couple of lines. We can not afford police, fire and teachers because of the unions. These folks are already in the top 25% of earners (at least in California) and they can retire at 50 years old. Also they can count the last years earnings including all overtime and shift diff, vacation as their earning toward retirement. Now you have people who were making $70,000 are now retiring at $100,000 plus. This is extremely common. I think they said California alone has over $50 billion in future retirement obligations. Not saying that these people don't have difficult jobs but their are some changes that can be made but the unions are in the way. Either we go broke or they have to go to battle with these unions to get change.

As far as money leaving the country. No kidding. Republicans have been telling people for years. Money it going to travel to the least expensive place and there is pretty much nothing you can do about it unless you shut those other countries out of our market. If they are in our market then we are going to lose out to them. We have all these people that want to live in some sort of idealistic world and they are killing out income. We are not allowed to drill for our own resources, we can not build any nuke plants, it takes a fortune to just build a manufacturing plant due to all the regulations. That is why we are loosing our jobs.

Also they can count the last years earnings including all overtime and shift diff, vacation as their earning toward retirement. Now you have people who were making $70,000 are now retiring at $100,000 plus. This is extremely common

Defined pension plans are just another way of buying votes. We need to make it by law that all pensions are based on individual accounts, must be funded in the year worked, and thereafter the investments are the responsibility of the beneficiary.

The 1% of earners actually pay 40% of all income taxes in the country.

And they should considering the 1% control 42% of the nations wealth and top 10% controls 93%. The average american pays 42% to 55% in taxes and I should feel bad that the 1% paid 40%? I don't think the wealthy should pay more, just pay the average percentage like other americans. Google payed 2.4% in taxes and saved $3.1 billion the last three years by moving most of its profits through Ireland and the Netherlands. How is this acceptable? Your politicians are bought and payed for by corporations like Google. How many of those homes are payed for by lobbyist?

Quote:

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

Shooter,

Also they can count the last years earnings including all overtime and shift diff, vacation as their earning toward retirement. Now you have people who were making $70,000 are now retiring at $100,000 plus. This is extremely common.

This is not true if you are talking California. It takes 30 years to receive a 90% max pension (formula is 3% for every year you work) Although you can retire at age 50, it is uncommon because most start between 25 & 30 years old. You can not "boost" your pension with overtime and vacation payoff.
Although I agree that some pension reform is needed, I disagree with going back on contracts that are in place. I'm expected to honor any contact I participate in and so should the government.

Although unions can sometimes be a problem, they helped make this country what it is. The corporations would love to remove collective bargaining (private & public) because they would no longer have any opposition. Without collective bargaining / unions, the american middle class would no longer have a voice. America's pay rates would crash and you would see even bigger separation of the classes.

The "elite" has used the recession to back the middle class into a corner. Unfortunately much of the middle class has been brainwashed by mainstream media to believe bigger business is what is best for them. It will be too late by the time Americans realizes their country has been sold out by the government and the people who have bought them out.

McGavin, there is no sense in talking to Someone. He despises the middle class (though I guarantee he is considered middle class), he still buys into the idea that if he works hard enough, he will eventually be in the 1%. He doesn't realize it is an exclusive club.

This is not true if you are talking California. It takes 30 years to receive a 90% max pension (formula is 3% for every year you work) Although you can retire at age 50, it is uncommon because most start between 25 & 30 years old. You can not "boost" your pension with overtime and vacation payoff.

You can in Florida. And defined benefits are a mistake because it allows the obligation for one's pension to be put onto people who didn't receive the services.

he still buys into the idea that if he works hard enough, he will eventually be in the 1%. He doesn't realize it is an exclusive club.

Jeremy, you are wrong about this. You're young and still a student so this is understandable.

By definition all of my clients, or at least nearly all, are 1%'ers. All of them are multi-millionaires. There is no "club". The multi-millionaires I know are as diverse as all the rest of us. They don't secretly get together and plan on how to stiff the rest of us. They don't have a conspiracy to keep the 99% "down", nothing like that. I know that this picture doesn't sell well in movies, at any of the Occupy movements or on college campuses etc. But every millionaire I have worked with, and that's many, many of them, have no such exclusivity about keeping the 99%'ers from finding their own success. In fact, just the opposite. When I do well and they learn about it, they're excited and pleased. It costs them nothing.

Wealth is not a zero sum game. Just because someone has more than you, doesn't mean they do so at your expense. I'll post a link if I can find it, but I recently read where less than 10% of the net worth of the top 1% wealthiest Americans comes from inheritance. Which is counter to the popular argument that the rich are rich because their parent's were rich. Specifically to Romney, I don't think he comes from a "Kennedy'esque" family of money. His father was a Governor and I'm sure well connected, but I do believe most of Romney's wealth is thru his own success as a fund manager. Furthermore, you're always going to have rich and poor in any society. ANY society. But ours is still set up as the most fair with regard to giving equal chance to become rich if you want to.
Two other points.... 1.) don't you kinda want someone who's been successful in life in public office? Just because someone is successful does not instantly make them corrupt (despite popular belief). and 2.) you CAN find people who've lived in the average middle class American's shoes in public office at ALL levels. Local, State and Federal. Ron Paul isn't the only one.
-disclaimer: I'm not particularly a Romney fan by the way.

Andy….I can only speak for myself, but I'm not a kid and have very good prospective regarding what i'm talking about. I have two jobs…One job I deal with the scum of the earth and the other I regularly deal with the VERY wealthy. My boss in the second job (who I like and somewhat consider a friend) is a billionaire. Most of extremely wealthy I meet are great people and a few treat anyone without extreme amounts of money as a lower form of life.

You are missing my point. I don't feel the "rich" are bad people planning to "stiff the rest of us" or "hold the middle class down". With money comes power and they do tend to care for their "class". This means their kids go to good schools and they give jobs to their friend's kid. Many of them have made their money in what I consider legal, but (lack of better words) immoral ways. With access to politicians and lawyers, I do feel they manipulate the system to benefit them and their "class".

One thing I have learned is they are not smarter than me or work any harder. It is a exclusive club that I will never have access to because of my born social class.

So back to my original point. I find it a bit hard to stomach that my government (job one) is trying to layoff 213 (half) of its employees because there is no money. At the same time, my boss' (job two) tax man recently told him he needs to buy a 5 million dollar helicopter for a tax write-off.

Oh yeah…. I forgot to mention that I recently took a 23% pay cut at job one (government job), yet people call me a "trough feeder" and "union thug" because I make a middle-class wage and have a pension.

Oh yeah…. I forgot to mention that I recently took a 23% pay cut at job one (government job), yet people call me a "trough feeder" and "union thug" because I make a middle-class wage and have a pension.

The top earners are under taxed, yet too many of the lower class lives off the government. The government is broke so many people are benefiting at my expense.

Although unions can sometimes be a problem, they helped make this country what it is. The corporations would love to remove collective bargaining (private & public) because they would no longer have any opposition. Without collective bargaining / unions, the american middle class would no longer have a voice.

I see Manu things wrong with this. Just because unions helped make this nation what it is doesn't necessarily mean they should stick around or are still beneficial. Slavery also helped make this nation what it is, should it have stuck around?

Also there are many places in this country where there is no union involvement. Much like in Texas and the offshore gulf oilfield. No unions and companies still take care of their employees and pay very well. I have never been a member of a union and I have only personally met one person that has or at least that I know has and the way he described what the union protected him from just sounded silly. He worked for an auto dealer and stated he needed a union to ensure that work got passed out fairly to all the technicians at the dealer. The dealer I worked at in Dallas never had a problem with this. Maybe in the south and Texas people are just nicer than everywhere else?

"do not pay their share in taxes because of tax code loopholes. Their greed is destroying America"

Jesus. So people that pay what they are supposed to pay are greedy because they are not paying more? What kind of BS is this. I work hard for my money, and am not giving one god ^&*. cent more than I have to so the governement can piss it away on more BS programs and regulations to keep me from making more. If I want to give to charity I will, but it better be on my terms, not some liberal jackasses.

Paul..you are ignorant or you think you are the 1%. You are right, we should cut that single mom's assistance so that millionaire can get a tax break for his helicopter. Come on, that single mom can also take advantage of that "helicopter" loophole! Many wealthy people do not work harder…Many wealthy people are not smarter. Many wealthy people were born into their social class.

This thread is like groundhog day and I'm done beating my head against a wall. I'm not a liberal…far from it. Lets cut the fat from both ends…first we will start from the top and cut corporate welfare. The propaganda that the wealthy create jobs and wealth for everyone is no longer working. Question, who caused the financial meltdown and who benefitted from it? Wake up…higher taxes and less service from our government is coming like a freight train (the us debt is 14 trillion and rising!). I'm a educated hard working middle class american and I'm not going to shoulder that burden myself (or pass it to my children). I work two respectable jobs and can barley afford my house payment, yet you don't want to pay your share of taxes because you need two boats? I forgot, you are smarter than me and work harder.

"greed is good"…Why don't we start thinking about whats best for this country instead of whats best for you…The statistics don't lie. America is on its way to failure. There will be no social security, no retirement, no job security, no basic service from our government and no middle class if we continue making the same mistakes.

Government designed the deductions(now they are apparently "loopholes" for people that don't get to use them).Without them most of the charities in the US would be bankrupt.

Many charities are just cover for more greed. If a business can't survive without corporate welfare then that business should fail to make way for someone who can succeed. The 1% shout capitalism and free market until they need a bailout or assistance. Then they tell us how much they need help and how much we need them.

I am neither. IF single mom can't live without assistance, then she should have thought about that before she BECAME A F&*(ing MOM!

How many dinners does the purchase of that helicopter, or private jet put on tables?

When $5,000,000 is given to a millionaire for a helicopter it "puts dinner on the table" and drives the economy...but when $5,000 in assistance is given to 1000 moms it is a waste of tax money? Your right, that wh@re should never had that kid in the first place!

Again, I'm not a fan of government hand outs to anyone that does not work for it, but a educated man should get my point.

Simple. Cut them off, or make them jump through hoops to prove they need it. If there were conseqences for lifestyle decisions in this country, then maybe people would try a little harder.

Seeing as how poor health from bad eating habits is a huge contributor to excessive health care costs I suggest everyone who feels this way support eliminating govt assistance in the healthcare arena. Of course this means the instant destruction of the entire healthcare system. But I see this as on the top of the list of govt welfare and waste. Just look at the budget pie charts and you'll agree.

"IF single mom can't live without assistance, then she should have thought about that before she BECAME A F&*(ing MOM!"

I'm sure that you'll be the first to tell someone abortion is murder. A-holes like you only care about kids when they're inside the womb. If I was half the miserable SOB you are, I'd probably just do the world a favor and blow my head off.

When $5,000,000 is given to a millionaire for a helicopter it "puts dinner on the table" and drives the economy...but when $5,000 in assistance is given to 1000 moms it is a waste of tax money? Your right, that wh@re should never had that kid in the first place!

Again, I'm not a fan of government hand outs to anyone that does not work for it, but a educated man should get my point.

Giving 1000 moms $5 isn't going to do ****, but waist money. Give incentives so people purchase aircraft from companies that employ hundreds of thousands will, but an educated man that works for, and is friends with, a billionaire should know this.

Giving 1000 moms $5 isn't going to do ****, but waist money. Give incentives so people purchase aircraft from companies that employ hundreds of thousands will, but an educated man that works for, and is friends with, a billionaire should know this.

This is faulty logic. Those 1000 moms are going to put that money right back into the same economy that employs people. The problem is money leaving the economy, which is why the trade deficit needs a reduction. You could make the case that a helicopter company is specifically the kind of employment we need. But I think that is best accomplished across the board by targeting American manufacturing as a priority by admitting the trade deficit is a problem and doing something about it.

And maybe your bank didn't take TARP funds but the Fed isn't loaning money directly to individuals at super low interest rates. Face it, the whole economy is a product of some kind of welfare.

shooter, I'm curious, you work directly for a billionaire and you have 2 jobs, and can barely make your house pmt? What do you do for him? My boss ( who is probably ,on pape,r a millionaire ( barely)) secretary makes 80-90k.

Sounds like you are making a leap of faith in that statement by saying the aircraft industry is fundamentally unsound. But if an industry can't survive without govt welfare, then.... Well you know the answer.

You don't have to teach me monetary policy. That wasn't the point of my post.

Well if you lived around here, you would know how unsound it is. We see huge layoffs all the time as demand fluctuates. My point was who should get the welfare? I would rather see the company get it that employs thousands than the mom that sits at home(I know not all welfare recip. are sitting at home!). The other big difference is that the incentives to purchase are less money the Gov. is taking in, not more they are giving out.

Adam, I fly his helicopter and BTW its a Eurocopter (where do you think that money goes?). It doesn't pay as well as you may think and its only part-time.. I admit that I will benefit from his helicopter purchase, but that still doesn't make it right.

I won't go into details regarding my finances, but I will say that my wife lost her job, I took a significant pay cut, my cost of living has skyrocketed (healthcare, fuel & food) and the cost of living in the "Real OC" is very high. The median home price in my county was 800K at the peak and still hovers around 400K. Needless to say that 80K a year for a family doesn't go very far.

I'm actually very happy with my life and pay, but I also see a trend of less jobs, lower pay and high cost of living that scares me. I'm educated and will never be out of work, but will I still be able to supply for my family if he trend continues? Will I be able to retire or will someone from the "greed is good" camp legally take that from me? Most important is will my children have the opportunities to be in the middle class if they work hard? These are all questions that my boss or the 1% never need to worry about.

^Nice point Shooter. Let's make sure those tax incentives target "Buy American". But they won't and the reason is because the US govt refuses to make any distinction. I'd rather give the money to a domestic welfare Mom than a foreign corporation.

Money not coming in is as bad as money going out. If the budget isn't balanced then the nation isn't paying it's bills. When people are making money but passing the debt to the next gen, I'm not seeing that as an upside.

BTW, I'm not posting this in support of welfare. I'm posting it because the tendency is for people to blame welfare and excuse themselves as part of the problem. If you buy gas and foreign made goods then you are part of the problem. I'm included, but I'm ready to chip in and solve it when everyone else is. Not before.